1.FINAL PAPERS SHOULD BE PREPARED AS WORD
DOCUMENTS (OR IN HTML FORMAT).THEY
SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE PHIL 410 ELECTRONIC DROPBOX.PLEASE MAKE SURE THE FILENAME BEGINS WITH
YOUR LAST NAME.There is no penalty for
length per se, but papers exceeding the guidelines (assuming 300 words per
page) will be penalized, if the paper could have been shortened by careful
editing.(Footnotes may appear on a
separate page.)Although papers are
evaluated chiefly on their philosophical merits, grammar, spelling, and diction
will also be evaluated.You are expected
to express your thoughts in clear, grammatical, English sentences.

2.OUTLINE OF YOUR PAPER.When you finish writing your paper, you
should be able to write an outline of it that shows how the different parts fit
together logically.

3.CITE FULLY AND ACCURATELY.Make sure you accurately state the position
of any author you discuss.Any time you
quote an author or attribute a proposition to an author, the quotation or
attribution must be supported by a citation to the text, with page
numbers.YOU MAY NOT CITE ME AS AN
AUTHORITY ON WHAT AN AUTHOR SAYS (UNLESS I AM THE AUTHOR!).YOU MUST CITE THE AUTHOR HIM/HERSELF.Where the reference is to a text in the
assigned readings, it is sufficient to provide page references in parentheses
immediately after the quotation or attribution.In all other cases, provide a full bibliographic reference in a footnote
or endnote.The page limit on the paper
applies to the text of the paper only.Footnotes are free.

4.TO SHOW THAT YOU UNDERSTAND AN AUTHOR'S
POSITION, IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO SIMPLY PARROT THE AUTHOR.Where you quote the author, make sure you
explain in your own words the significance of the quoted material.It is often helpful to use your own examples
to clarify the views of the author you are discussing.

5. USE CARE IN INTERPRETING AN
AUTHOR, PARTICULARLY SOMEONE YOU DISAGREE WITH.If on your interpretation of an author, the author either is
inconsistent or has made an obvious error of reasoning, begin by assuming that
you have misinterpreted the author.Reread the relevant passages carefully to see if you can put together a
consistent position that is not obviously erroneous.If you cannot do so, come to my office hours
or make an appointment to discuss it with me.

6.CAREFULLY DISTINGUISH VIEWS THAT YOU CLAIM AN
AUTHOR HOLDS FROM VIEWS THAT YOU CLAIM THE AUTHOR SHOULD HOLD OR IS COMMITTED
TO HOLDING.Claims that an author holds
a particular view must be supported with cites to the text.But claims that an author should hold or is
committed to holding a particular view must be supported with relevant
arguments, in addition to cites to the text.

7. USE LABELS.In your paper, you will typically have to
distinguish between a number of different theses or positions.It is often useful to give names or labels to
the various theses or positions, for ease of reference.Consider, for example, how useful it is to
define a protected sphere, and to define rights violations in terms of
certain kinds of interference in one's protected sphere.Sometimes it is useful to compare authors by
the differences in their how they would make the relevant definitions.For example, one might define Thomson's
protected sphere and distinguish it from Mill's protected sphere.
Sometimes it is necessary to consider a series of refinements to that statement
of a thesis or position.For example,
you might begin with an initial definition of a protected sphere, PS-1,
and then consider refinements to it PS-2, PS-3, etc. Whenever you
use a label, always clearly state what the label refers to.

8.USE EXAMPLES.In philosophy, it is easy to get lost in a discussion of abstract ideas.
You should not feel that you understand an author's view unless you can explain
how it applies to relevant examples.In
your paper, you should not deal entirely in abstractions.You should try to develop one or two or more
examples which (perhaps with some variations) can be used to illustrate the
main issues in the paper.For the first
paper topic, I provide you with an example to discuss.You may still want to develop variations on
my example to illustrate the philosophical issues. For the second paper topic,
you select the issue.You must provide
the examples to illustrate the discussion of the issue.

9. CRITICAL EVALUATION.In your paper, you must critically evaluate
the positions taken by authors you discuss—that is, you must take your own
stand on which side is, on balance, the most reasonable position to take, and
explain why you think so.

10.USE THE PRONOUNS “I/ME”.In your paper you must use the pronouns
“I/me”.Using these pronouns enables
you to take control of the structure of the paper and to tell the reader what
to expect.It also enables you to enter
into the critical evaluation of the various views.In the introduction you will say such things as:In section 4 I will review what A has to say
about X; or I will argue that Z.When
you introduce a label you will say something like:I will use [label] X to refer to Y.In the critical evaluation, you will say
things like:I believe that A makes a
stronger case for X than B makes for Y, because Z; or A’s position seems more
plausible to me than B’s, because of Z.

11.AVOID PLAGIARISM.Whenever you turn in any assignment in this
course, the understanding is that what you are turning in is your own original
work, except to the extent that you explicitly credit others for their contributions.
You have an obligation to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, by
always attributing any argument or idea that you have borrowed, even if you
have modified it, to its source.The
source may be written or oral.For
example, if an argument was suggested by a fellow student, include that
information in a footnote.

12.PHILOSOPHYWRITINGCENTER.You may avail yourself of the services of the
PhilosophyWritingCenter
to obtain a preliminary reading of a draft of your paper.The Philosophy Writing Center is located in Savery 362.A
sign-up sheet for WritingCenter appointments is
posted outside the door.The Writing
Center Tutors will not evaluate your paper for philosophical content, but they
will be able to help you make sure that your makes sense and that it says what
you intend it to say.

STYLISTIC
SUGGESTIONS

(including
some adopted from Professor BonJour)

1. Make sure that you express
yourself in complete sentences.Each
sentence must contain, at a minimum, a subject and a predicate in grammatical
agreement that make sense together.

2.A common mistake is sentences that run on too
long.Two or more gramatically
complete sentences should be separated by a period, not a comma.If you want to link them more closely, you
can use a semi-colon, or a comma and a conjunction (e.g., "and" or
"but).Other things being equal,
two short sentences are better than one longer sentence.

3.Check the meanings and spellings of all words
that you are not sure of.It is
recommended that you use a computer spelling checker before printing your final
draft.

4.Some people believe that really good
philosophy must be very deep, and thus hard to understand.You will not be rewarded for such writing in
this course.Your goal should be to make
your papers as clear, as unambiguous, and as easy to understand as the subject
matter allows.A good way to test for
awkward constructions as well as for sense is to read your paper aloud to
someone else, or even just to yourself.You may also have it read by one of the tutors in the PhilosophyWritingCenter.Your paper should make sense to most
reasonably intelligent people (even someone not taking this course), though, of
course, they need not be persuaded by your arguments.You are encouraged to discuss the paper topic
with other students in the course, but you are responsible for making your
paper your own original work, except for the sources that you explicitly
acknowledge and cite in the paper itself.